Why the Future Lies in Art Fairs

"The Meeting of Odysseus and Nausicaa," covered in grime, sold at Christie's for £2.05 million. It will be on display in pristine condition at the 26th European Fine Art Fair in Maastricht.Credit
Haboldt & Co.

The 26th European Fine Art Fair will open its doors to a private viewing on Thursday in Maastricht, the Netherlands. The selling show is widely acknowledged as the most important of its kind, but the implications of its phenomenal development have yet to be realized. This epitomizes the profound transformation of the art market in recent decades.

Until World War II, dealers dominated the market. Then, by the early 1950s, galleries began to lose ground to auction houses, and within 20 years, these became the locomotive pulling all categories to indefinitely rising price levels. The drastic contraction of supplies of the art from past centuries over the last five decades now threatens the very existence of the auction houses. Soon, there may not be enough left in the market to provide the quantities needed to make the expensive system financially viable.

The two world giants, Christie’s and Sotheby’s, try hard to get a bigger piece of the global art cake by enticing consignors through ever more ambitious estimates. As prices get higher for works of decreasing quality, failures to sell multiply. This is a disruptive tactic that could drive the entire auction market into a brick wall. It makes the art fair the most plausible solution of the future.

Nowhere is that clearer than in the Old Masters section at The European Fine Art Fair, or Tefaf.

The contrast it offers with the New York auctions of late January is striking. In its morning session, Sotheby’s sold about as many pictures as those that dropped unwanted. The estimates coupled with assorted reserves — the undisclosed limit below which auction houses contractually agree not to let consigned works go — were so high that the session resembled a lottery, with a touch of Russian roulette.

In New York, a distinguished Sotheby’s expert observed to me with a touch of pique that what does not sell at Maastricht is equally ignored. Quite so, and with good reason. The appearance of a picture at the fair that has not yet found a taker by the time it ends does not damage its commercial image and therefore does not compromise its future success. Informed players in the art market know full well that it can take weeks, or months, for deals to be concluded.

Indeed, the option that buyers have to reserve works and take their time to negotiate them is an asset for an art fair. Newcomers, unsure of their judgment, find the explanations given by dealers in the course of discussions more reassuring than those offered by auction houses, inevitably less detailed. Moreover, common sense tells you that an auction house expert is not best placed to give impartial advice. I have yet to hear experts in charge of an auction warning that a work of art is too mediocre, or that their estimate is exaggerated.

Even condition will be assessed with greater precision by good dealers — they do not want their clients ever to risk hearing a contradictory material assessment at some later stage.

All this contributed to give the best dealers a considerable advantage while art for sale was available in abundance. Unfortunately, the drying up of supplies has hit them badly, too. Browsing around galleries made the game exciting as long as discoveries were frequent enough. The chances of making one are now considerably slimmer. Not only that, strolling around the world’s capitals has lost much of its allure. Traffic and pollution spoil the pleasure.

Moreover, lifestyles have changed. Weekends away from the city have cut down the time available for art hunting. Attendance in art galleries has plummeted — just pay a visit to the most famous of them and often you hardly see a soul.

This year, Agnew’s, founded in 1817, is making its last stand at Maastricht, and will close down a month later. Colnaghi, another veteran of the Old Masters trade in London, gave up its museum-style showroom on the ground floor of its Old Bond Street premises and retreated upstairs.

Photo

In 2010 at Maastricht, Haboldt sold a masterpiece previously unrecorded, a self-portrait by Cornelis van Haarlem that is now on loan to the Frans Hals Museum in Haarlem.Credit
Haboldt & Co.

More compelling evidence of the sea change affecting the Old Masters business is provided by Bob Haboldt’s decision in 2008 to become a dealer by appointment only, albeit still on his Paris premises. This connoisseur dealer is one of the most dynamic members in his profession. Last year, he published under his imprint a luxurious art book reproducing 54 of the finest among the 2,500 or so pictures and drawings that he handled in a 30-year career. Over a third of those that have found takers have been sold at fairs, some at the Paris Biennale, most at Maastricht.

A major reason for the supremacy of the Dutch fair is the concentration of top-quality pictures. That makes it a must for all leading collectors, museum directors and curators alike.

Johnny Van Haeften of London, the European leader in Dutch and Flemish masters, sets aside his greatest finds for Maastricht throughout the year and estimates that the deals struck at the fair, or as a result of it, account for 30 percent to 40 percent of his annual turnover. An essential ingredient explaining the success of Maastricht is that all dealers make an effort to bring discoveries.

You are already subscribed to this email.

Last December, one of the most remarkable paintings by Jacob Jordaens, “The Meeting of Odysseus and Nausicaa,” was sold at Christie’s for £2.05 million, or $3.13 million. Done in his grandest Rubensian manner, the mythological scene is set in a landscape with admirable chiaroscuro light effects. The Jordaens, known from a valuation made in 1865, had never been illustrated before its reproduction in the Christie’s catalogue. Its glory, however, could be surmised rather than seen under a film of dirt and decaying varnish accumulated over 150 years.

It takes the eye of a professional with long experience to evaluate the actual state of the paint surface of a picture under these circumstances. Few collectors are able not only to make this assessment but, more important, to form a mental image of what the grimy picture might look like after cleaning. At the private viewing on Thursday, privileged guests will discover the Jordaens gleaming in pristine condition on Mr. Van Haeften’s stand. There, they will also see an admirable painting by Joachim Wtewael, “Maternal Charity.” Signed and dated 1623, this landmark in the Dutch Mannerist artist’s later oeuvre had come up at Christie’s December auction. But it is only after cleaning that the glory of its color scheme with its glazes intact was revealed for the first time in living memory.

A Russian collector was tempted to get the gem but, a professional in the trade tells me, he abstained, uncertain of how well preserved the paint surface would turn out to be after cleaning — buying a picture obscured by dirt is a gamble.

Discoveries at Maastricht do not necessarily belong in the multimillion-dollar category. In 2010, Haboldt sold a pure masterpiece previously unrecorded, for which the asking price was €275,000, or $368,000. It is a self-portrait by Cornelis van Haarlem, now on loan to the Frans Hals Museum in Haarlem.

This year, Haboldt will offer a hitherto unrecorded portrait of a young girl painted in The Hague by Karel de Moor in the 1670s. The delightful small panel is priced under €100,000.

The dealer will also display two matching still lifes by Harmen Verelst with a price set for the pair below the €500,000 mark. The Dutch pictures turned up in a minor auction held last year at Della Rocca in Turin.

One, a fruit still life, duly signed and dated 1674, was cataloged as the work of Harmen Verelst, who joined the St. Luke guild in The Hague in 1663 together with his brother Simon.

No signature was visible on the other still life, which depicts flowers. As Harmen was known to have done only fruit still lifes, Della Rocca plausibly speculated that the flowers could be Simon’s work. After Haboldt had an overlayer of discolored varnish removed, a signature appeared: that of Harmen, whose work is thus seen to have been wider in scope than hitherto realized.

And that kind of discovery explains why hundreds of visitors in expensive suits will rush in a stampede elbowing each other like soccer fans to get in ahead of the competition at Tefaf’s private showing.